I'm hearing disturbing rumours of this movie being Prometheus-level stupid. Adjusting expectations accordingly.

Alright, bandwith warning for some hi-res shots of the bridge from io.com
http://io9.com/exclusive-never-before-s … -476164858

No spoilers. Also, I think we need to have a "Goddamnit Lindelof!" GIF as one of the standard gifs on the forum

I assume you're talking about

See, I vehemently disagree that this should be the case. You have a giant universe of infinite stories you can tell, and the only framework their capable of is rehashing Wrath of Khan for the 4th time out. The level of narrative laziness and cowardice is mind-boggling to me. Look at the TOS movies, there's 6 of them, and they for the most part all try to do totally different types of stories, and for the most part it works great.

I happen to like Star Trek the Motion Picture a lot, you take that style of movie and fix some of the pacing issues, and it would be awesome. It's really depressing that something like that isn't even an option. Would it kill them to make a movie called Star "TREK" be about actual exploration?! But no, we gotta have 50% of it take place on earth, and a villain Kirk can have a punch-out fight with.

Maybe Nolan's Interstellar next year will scratch that TOS itch, I guess we'll see.

I'll spoiler this for my thoughts. Spoilers if you haven't read the prequel comic or Doc's comment.

Ok, spoilers done.

This could escalate quickly, but I am glad to hear different takes here.

For my part, I actually like Abrams approach because he is actually dealing with the consequences of the first film. Kirk is captain, but inexperienced, cocky and full of himself. He isn't perfect or polished like the Prime version we know. Instead, he has go through a trial by fire and the crew actually has to gel under his command. Its a lot messier than the TV show and I think that is a good thing, for the most part.

Here's the other thing, as Marty pointed out-Hollywood is not as likely to take those risks. Formulas work because its a business model. And, no offense to all my fellow Trek fans, Star Trek has become a bit stuck it a rut. Not that Abrams vision is the only one that should be presented, but it lost itself in the formula of bad guy of the week, defeat them, move on, no consequences.

So Abrams, for all the slamming against him, is taking Kirk and instead of just putting him in command and he carries on Shatner's legacy, we see a man making mistakes, having to grow, having to be challenged and dealing with consequences. There are not many Trek episodes that do that.

Would an actual exploration movie be better? I think so, yes. I am tired of Earth being the center point, kind of like in Dr. Who series 1 when a lot of episodes centered in Cardiff. Needed a break from the scenery.

I maintain, and still do, that a show about the Kelvin and her crew would be an excellent show. I think that could capture the exploration aspect, especially with Robau's chilling comment that "There is no help for us out here." That is something that could be explored.

I honestly am hoping to hear Trey's thoughts on the Motion Picture and the direction of the Star Trek franchise now. Glad to see more discussion here

A released clip from Paramount showing Harrison and Kirk squaring off:

Honestly I would love to see a hard R, just full out go fucking nuts with the borg. Cause there's some reeeally fun stuff you could do with them if you didn't have to keep it pg-13 (Or whatever TNG/VOY had to be). But alas, it'll never happen.

Not lookin good
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/reviewsn … ?id=103724
On the other hand: http://www.hitfix.com/motion-captured/r … darkness/1

Last edited by bullet3 (2013-05-03 01:41:01)

http://blogs.indiewire.com/criticwire/m … ss-reviews

Actually, early reviews are mostly positive. The negative ones are REALLY negative, though, which makes me wonder.